August 07, 2014

When science works: the myth of gluten sensitivity

I know this isn't exactly environmental, but a couple of side interests of mine have been 1) the ability of health fads and information conveyance (or misinformation) to affect behavior, and 2) using science for mythbusting. Here's a case where anomalous scientific findings--gluten causes intestinal issues in some non-celiac patients--helped establish a multi-billion dollar industry and convince thousands upon thousands that they are gluten-sensitive. So what happens now when the same scientist who established gluten sensitivity, follows up with two, more rigorous, studies and finds that non-celiac gluten sensitivity, well, doesn't exist.

In one of the best examples of science working, a researcher who provided key evidence of (non-celiac disease) gluten sensitivity recently published follow-up papers that show the opposite.

So what will happen when those 17% of adults who don't have celiac disease read this:

For a follow-up paper [by the same authors who wrote the original paper that found gluten sensitiveity existed], 37 self-identified gluten-sensitive patients were tested...

The subjects cycled through high-gluten, low-gluten, and no-gluten (placebo) diets, without knowing which diet plan they were on at any given time. In the end, all of the treatment diets — even the placebo diet — caused pain, bloating, nausea, and gas to a similar degree. It didn't matter if the diet contained gluten. (Read more about the study.)

In other words, subjects who THOUGHT they were gluten sensitive had the same belly troubles, even if their diet contained no gluten. Consumer behavior is driven by perception.

So what happens now? My guess, good science will take a long time to prevail. Now that gluten sensitivity is entrenched as a consumer reality, it will take a long time for the myth to disipate in the market.

Comments

When science works: the myth of gluten sensitivity

I know this isn't exactly environmental, but a couple of side interests of mine have been 1) the ability of health fads and information conveyance (or misinformation) to affect behavior, and 2) using science for mythbusting. Here's a case where anomalous scientific findings--gluten causes intestinal issues in some non-celiac patients--helped establish a multi-billion dollar industry and convince thousands upon thousands that they are gluten-sensitive. So what happens now when the same scientist who established gluten sensitivity, follows up with two, more rigorous, studies and finds that non-celiac gluten sensitivity, well, doesn't exist.

In one of the best examples of science working, a researcher who provided key evidence of (non-celiac disease) gluten sensitivity recently published follow-up papers that show the opposite.

So what will happen when those 17% of adults who don't have celiac disease read this:

For a follow-up paper [by the same authors who wrote the original paper that found gluten sensitiveity existed], 37 self-identified gluten-sensitive patients were tested...

The subjects cycled through high-gluten, low-gluten, and no-gluten (placebo) diets, without knowing which diet plan they were on at any given time. In the end, all of the treatment diets — even the placebo diet — caused pain, bloating, nausea, and gas to a similar degree. It didn't matter if the diet contained gluten. (Read more about the study.)

In other words, subjects who THOUGHT they were gluten sensitive had the same belly troubles, even if their diet contained no gluten. Consumer behavior is driven by perception.

So what happens now? My guess, good science will take a long time to prevail. Now that gluten sensitivity is entrenched as a consumer reality, it will take a long time for the myth to disipate in the market.

Rankings

"This blog aims to look at more of the microeconomic ideas that can be used toward environmental ends. Bringing to bear a large quantity of external sources and articles, this blog presents a clear vision of what economic environmentalism can be."

Google Ads

Don't believe what they're saying

And allow me a quick moment to gush: ... The env-econ.net blog was more or less a lifeline in that period of my life, as it was one of the few ways I stayed plugged into the env. econ scene. -- Anonymous

... the Environmental Economics blog ... is now the default homepage on my browser (but then again, I guess I am a wonk -- a word I learned on the E.E. blog). That is a very nice service to the profession.-- Anonymous

"... I try and read the blog everyday and have pointed it out to other faculty who have their students read it for class. It is truly one of the best things in the blogosphere."-- Anonymous